While some respondents acknowledged that maintaining existing school structures (Options 3 and 4) offers less disruption in the short term, the majority favored Option 5, v2 (Grade Banding) as the superior long-term strategy for the following reasons:
1.1 Equity and the "Collective Reset.”
A dominant theme was the desire to avoid "singling out" specific communities. Leaders expressed concern that Options 3 and 4—which involve closing Merriam or merging it with McCarthy-Towne—would signal that some school cultures are "expendable," creating "lasting harm," division, and resentment. ● Fresh Start: Option 5, v2 was praised for allowing the district to "reimagine school communities" where no group feels like outsiders or "newcomers" entering an established culture. Instead, all staff, students, and families would "walk through this enormous amount of change together," creating a shared sense of belonging. ● Equitable Disruption: Respondents noted that while Option 5 is disruptive, it distributes the burden of change equitably rather than asking one or two schools to bear the "disproportionate impact.”
1.2. Targeted Instruction and Resource Efficiency
Leaders argued that Option 5, v2 provides the best structural environment for academic success by consolidating resources.
● Specialized Support: Grouping students by grade bands (K-3 and 4-6) allows for more "centralized" and "leveraged" resources, particularly for Special Education, English Learners, and mental health support. ● Curriculum Focus: The model allows educators to focus on a narrower developmental range, enabling "targeted professional learning" and allowing specialists to better support specific age groups rather than stretching across seven grade levels.
1.3. Concerns Regarding "Mega Schools" (Option 6)
Option 6 (Three large K-6 schools) was explicitly criticized as the "least optimal choice" for student wellbeing.
● Loss of Connection: Leaders feared that in schools approaching 1,000 students, building leaders would become "managers" rather than instructional leaders. ● Deep Relationships: There was concern that such large environments would make fostering "deeper staff relationships" and student connections significantly more challenging.
1.4. Short-Term vs. Long-Term Trade-offs
Several respondents noted that while moving fewer children (Options 3 or 4) might yield better wellbeing outcomes in the immediate next year due to lower disruption, the long-term benefits of Option 5, v2 (targeted instruction, unified culture), outweighed the initial transition challenges. One leader noted that "children/students are resilient," and that the first year of change would be hard work regardless of the option chosen.
Made with FlippingBook Digital Publishing Software